Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 138185 (ALL)

PIYUSH PRATAP PAL @ PIYUSH PAL v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. DEPTT. HOME AFFAIRS LKO.

BAIL/3788/2025 · 2025-05-05

Subhash Vidyarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25814 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3788 of 2025 Applicant :- Piyush Pratap Pal @ Piyush Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Affairs Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Umesh Chandra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Umesh Chandra, the learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri Ashok Kumar Tiwari, the learned AGA for the State and perused the records. 2. This is first application seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.0106/2024, under Sections 302/120-B, 504, 506 and 34 IPC, Police Station Patti, District Pratapgarh. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged on 21.03.2024 against three unknown persons, stating that while the informant's brother was going with his son to drop him to his college on his motorcycle, three unknown persons shot at his chest. Son of the deceased tried to catch the assailants but they escaped while brandishing their weapons and threatening to kill the person. 4. The postmortem examination report mentions a single fire arm injury on chest of the deceased and cause of death was opined to be ante mortem firearm injury. 5. The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and he has submitted that a charge sheet has been submitted on 12.06.2024. During investigation it came to light that son of the deceased, who was accompanying him at the time of the incident, had himself conspired for killing of his father with the assistance of his friends, including the applicant, and they had hired three persons, who have given effect to the incident. It has come to light that Rs. 45,000/- had been transferred from the bank account of father of Shubham Soni in two transactions. 6. Copies of statements of PW-1 and PW-2 recorded by the trial court had been brought on record along with the affidavit. PW-1 is the informant, who has not witnessed the incident and he merely reiterated the FIR version. PW-2 Siraj Ahmad also has not witnessed the incident and no significant fact has come to light in this examination by the trial court. The deceased's son Saif, who has been made an accused, has been granted bail treating him to be juvenile. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted two co- accused persons, namely, Priyanshu @ Golu, Shubham Soni and Aakash Gupta have already been enlarged on bail by this Court by means of orders dated 05.04.2025 and 23.04.2025, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 576 of 2025, 565 of 2025 and 11987 of 2024 respectively. A co-accused who is minor has also been enlarged on bail by Juvenile Justice Board by means of an order dated 19.07.2024. 8. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the allegation against the applicant is having been involved in a conspiracy with the deceased's son; that the only evidence to support the allegation of involvement in commission of conspiracy is transfer of Rs. 45,000/- in two transactions from the bank account of father of Subham Soni but no amount has been transferred to the applicant's account and the applicant is a young man aged 20 years having no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 08.04.2024 and four co-accused persons have already been enlarged on bail, I am of the view that the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail. 9. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Piyush Pratap Pal @ Piyush Pal be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 5.5.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench